Past research indicates that people judge repeated statements as more true than new ones. An experiential consequence of repetition that may underly this “truth effect” is processing fluency: processing statements feels easier following their repetition. Here, we examine the effect of merely instructed (i.e., not experienced) repetition on truth judgments, which we compared to the effect of factual repetition. In two preregistered experiments (N=468), we found a larger truth effect for factual repetition compared to instructed repetition. However, we also found a non-experiential contribution to truth judgments: statements instructed to be repeated were judged more true than those instructed to be new. Experiment 2 further clarified that adding a repetition status tag in the factual repetition condition did not impact truth judgments. Moreover, for both experienced and instructed repetition, the effect on truth was qualified by subjective recognition. We discuss the mechanisms that can explain the impact of instructed repetition on truth and its implications for a better understanding of the truth effect.